The Smiley Smile Message Board

Uk mag Q gives TSS three stars - not a great one pit rightly highlights GV H&V CE W SU as being magnificent

Reviewer?

Any reason for not giving it a great review?

Three stars (presumably out of five) still seems a pretty decent store, bearing in mind 4 CDs of this box are going to be of little interest to those not already obsessed with SMiLE.

It's a horrible score, considering the very same magazine gave Razorlight's S/T album 5 stars a few years ago. One of the worst albums in the history of rock n roll.

lol razorlight.

I wouldn't worry-Q magazine has been poor for years. I gave up subscribing a few years back because I was sick of seeing Bono/Chris Martin/Razorlight/McCartney landing on my doormat once a month.

Mojo gave TSS 5/5 with a small interview with Brian.

Heck, Entertainment Weekly "only" gave The Pet Sounds Sessions a B, specifically spelling out the exact same reason that TerryWogan mentioned. Pet Sounds as an album, though, got at least an A.

Sometimes I have difficulty distinguishing typos from British slang.

How they heck do you rate razorlight better than SMiLE. ???

Too much filler - die hard fans only

Who reads reviews anyways?  Like I'm gonna take somebody else's opinion on what sounds good.   The best way to discover what sounds good is to listen to IT, not somebody bitching about it. 

I haven't read it yet, so I can only go off of the star rating, but barring some flat-out condemnation in the review itself, I don't see the problem either.

You have to keep in mind that Q is writing for their audience, one of modern-day rock and pop fans. Assuming the question is, "Should someone with no exposure to Smile pay $110 for this?", then three stars seems like a perfectly fair review.

Obscene.

If you want to give the collection three stars, that's fine. If you want to say in your review that the full set is geared for die hards, that's fine. But to base your review of an album on whether or not the average consumer will find it worth their money is absurd. How about judging the collection by how good the stuff is that's on it?

Q think Elbow are the best band of all time.  Ignore them.

Think about the people who read Q. Do you think many of these people have a lot of exposure to Smile? I would guess not.

If you've never heard any Smile whatsoever, you probably don't need this 5-disc box set.

(And, who knows, maybe the review is for Beach Boys fans, or maybe that was a disclaimer in the review, or something. I have no idea. I'm just saying, a three-star review from a contemporary music magazine is nothing to cry blasphemy over.)

Well, in 2006, Q Readers placed Pet Sounds #12 in the Greatest Album of All Time poll. A little lower than it usually gets in non-fan polls, but that's still pretty good and enough to suggest that a sizeable amount of Q readers are big Beach Boys fans.

Plus, to repeat myself, if you want to say in your review that the full set is geared for die hards, that's fine. Hell,fill the whole review up with words to that effect. But to base your actual rating of the review on that fact is, like I said, obscene.


Sure, but that has nothing to do with how good (or bad) the collection is.


I agree. Again, to repeat, if you want to give the album three stars, that's fine. The reason given here is what's ridiculous.

The review appears to be for their general readership.  It said something along the lines of 'make no mistake, for the serious fan, this is a very big deal'.  I wonder though if they would (or should) give a different mark to the 2-disc, rather than the big box.  Perhaps they ought to review both.

The star ranking is for Q's readers, not Beach Boys fans. Why is this so "obscene"? If I had never heard Smile before and was subjected to five hours of recording sessions from it, I'd find that laborious. And while I respect the wish that the star ranking was for Beach Boys fans, not doing it that way isn't unfair or ridiculous.


Now that would actually be the more interesting review of the two.

The review shouldn't be for Beach Boys fans either.

I guess this is why music reviews are an abomination under every circumstance - instead of critics evaluating the work, they evaluate the audience.

Come to think of it, 'cos I only had a quick browse, the review might've been for the album generally and not for the box, particularly, though it had a paragraph or so talking about what you get with it.  As said by the OP, the few big tracks were called magnificent, but it referred to getting 'nonsense' like Vegetables too.

I actually hope most of the reviews concern the 2-CD version. It'll be interesting to see which tracks resonate with reviewers or not, since this is the version of the two that will probably (hopefully?) be the most popular.

Is Q the magazine that named U2 the greatest act of the last 25 years and Coldplay the best act in the world today?   :lol

How many people actually listen to the sessions part of the PS box for fun?

Of course it's only going to get an average review, it's not The Beatles is it? Which as every self respecting Q reader knows is the only group from that period that was any good! Who cares about old music anyway when we could be discussing the collective merits of U2, Kings of Lameon, Jessie Jane and the mighty COLDPLAY!!

Eat a bag of s*it Q Magazine.

Just beat me to it..

I do. Mostly just the instrumentals, because it's fucking mozart + bach. But also the sessions sometimes.
It's a lot more rewarding than 99 % of the other stuff I have on iTunes

Me Too!

What did they give BWPS when it came out?

Let's forget Q, And read a proper review

http://godisinthetvzine.co.uk/index.php/2011/10/25/the-beach-boys-the-smile-sessions-capitolemi/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter (http://godisinthetvzine.co.uk/index.php/2011/10/25/the-beach-boys-the-smile-sessions-capitolemi/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

Indeed. Such a wealth of beauty on those extra discs.....that vocal snippet for 'Don't Talk' is heavenly. I listen to the boxset sessions a lot. I'm really looking forward to the vocals-only montage for TSS!!!

A release like this should be reviewed by someone who knows its worth and its audience, which, for the complete box, isn't, after all, a general one. Do you think they'd do the same with a similar Beatles or Dylan or (God forbid) U2 release?

Rhetorical question.

My message to Q Magazine: BITE ME!

TSS should receive 6 starts out of 5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Easy to see why Q only gave TSS three stars - after all, it wasn't released by any of Coldplay, U2, Oasis or Red Hot Chilli Peppers.

Good old Q, eh?

Preach it brother!  The backing track for "Here Today" especially the bridge - Jeez!

PS: U2 is probably the most overrated band that I have ever come across period.

U2 really seem to be a case of the Emperor's new clothes. Let's face it they made one great album back in the 1980's and have been slipping further into mediocrity ever since. 

I didn't say instrumentals -- which are genius -- I said sessions.

And truthfully, while the Brian and musician interchange is fun, and some of the alternate early tries are interesting, I find sessions material generally a bit repetitive. I mean, I have -- available, somehow -- all the SOT sets, and they are just not what I would consider super-listenable.

Taking that into account, though, I think TSS -- simply because of its place as the high water mark of BW's abilities, and the plethora of alternate versions of nearly everything -- will probably prove the exception for me.

With all due respect I totally disagree.  The Beatles and The Beach Boys especially The Beach Boys, their studio sessions are something I think every serious music fan needs to listen to at least once (probably more).  Paul McCartney once said that "nobody's musical education is complete without listening to Pet Sounds", I'd take that a step further and extend it to The Pet Sounds Sessions.  It's not just the interaction between Brian and the musicians but really what Chuck Britz says on the Hawthorne cd about how Brian built his records in the studio.  

As someone else alluded to we never got a chance to hear Mozart or Bach compose but you have these two bands that were so proficient at making records, it's really so fortunate that we've had the opportunity to listen in as much as we have to the creative process.  

Now I understand the point about the general public not "getting it" the way most of us do but to me that is on them.  It's really nothing other than their loss in my opinion.

Get some paper and scribble on it, for the genuine sound of Mozart and Bach composing. Trust me, it works!

...more often than not no one heard Mozart compose... he would work out most if not all of it in his head. He is, IMO, the Greatest Ever- Period. To think he died at 35...

Some of you folks are getting so worked up over this review and others sure to come. Really...who gives a sh!t what the reviews say?

Heres my review without even hearing it.

TSS. It is what it is. Expect to see this set on the shelves in some form forever. The single CD a must for anyone with a passing interest in music and the boxset for the serious music lover. Enjoy!

That would be true for me too, if I'd never heard Coldplay. 

All that really matters is that Pitchfork will give this a 10.0/10  ;D

They seem to adore the Beach Boys

*waves*

Wonder how they'd rate Wishbone Ash?

I'm expecting more of a 9.5

Screw Q!

Picard! I'm hurt!

I'm sure people who are aware of Smile will love the basic LP and or CD, historians like us will love the entire box which isn't designed for the average person. Still the review seems rather harsh. If this was a 1976 box I would understand, but Brian and the Beach Boys in their first dozen years together made musical history. Music doesn't come much better than Smile and I frankly don't care if some uninformed critic doesn't understand that.

Yeah I'm sure they'll knock off a point because they feel like there are too many boxsets coming out. Pitchfork really sucks, you can see them slowly drift into irrelevance like a 21st century Rolling Stone. I mean their year end lists now have corporate sponsors...

I remember their original review of Pet Sounds, the reviewer gave it a 7.something and said it was outdated. Just like they gave a decidedly unenthusiastic review to Daft Punk's Discovery upon first release, before LCD Soundsystem and Kanye West turned it into one of the most popular albums of the decade (#3 album of the decade according to Pitchfork).

I stopped buying Q years ago it as it became more and more of a comic. If I'd've been the reviewer I'd've given SMiLE a rating of infinity out of a squillion which is more like it.

It's official: I don't care!  ::) ::)

If Pitchfork give TSS any less than 8.0, all the early 20something Pitchdorks will say "ah, looks like Smile's not as good as it's meant to be.  Guess I won't bother downloading it from a blog"

That magazine can say what they want about U2 but the band has never been the same since Bono died in that skiing accident.

Who is that pretentious  arrogant ass they hired to replace him?

Billy Shears

Glowing review

http://theorangepress.net/2011/10/review-beach-boys-–-the-smile-sessions/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=review-beach-boys-%25e2%2580%2593-the-smile-sessions

I disagree, they gave Smiley Smile a 9.1 or whatever, and raved about Smile in that review. They talked about it trumping Pepper and all that, and in order to stay in line with that review and that rating (I know consistency may not be Pitchfork's greatest asset) they're obliged to give it a ten.

However, when they rate their "box" sets, they also consider value. That being said, if they rate the album solely as the album itself, andnot the entire box set, it will surely receive a ten.

Ah, I just mentioned Q's mundane review in another thread before I saw this thread here. I agree with all those who say Q is a fairly lame mag these days... It seems to consistantly praise mediocrity and dullness. I mean it just awarded U2 a Best Band Of The Last 25 Years award. Just horrendous really...

U2 in a nutshell-

Beginnings to mid 80's - Crappy new wave/punk.
Made a very good album with The Unforgettable Fire.
Made an even better one with Joshua Tree.
Fell under the missimpression that they were from America for Rattle & Hum.

Return with Achtung Baby, which contains great singles and a stack of filler.
Zooropa and Pop are the soundtracks of Bono disappearing up his own arse.
Settle into dreary mainstream 'stadium rock' , which nobody would care about if it didn't come from a very famous band.
Present day.

Agreed on all accounts - except I find Zooropa to be a fantastic album - I know I shouldn't like it, but I do for some reason haha.

THe song U2 did with Johnny Cash is pretty awesome imo. Otherwise I agree.